Ghost estate claims first victim

Eric Cartman · 24-02-2012 09:45PM

Zebra3 wrote: »

I doubt any developers or FF scum who helped cause all this crap will bat an eyelid about it all. :rolleyes:

you know I hear they did 9/11 aswell, and they ruined your birthday that time, and you know when you lose a sock - yep you guessed it.

Dudess · 24-02-2012 09:50PM

gemma188 wrote: »

KKkitty wrote: »

Anyone who has blamed FF for this just think for a second, will any of FF actually care or feel any guilt. Simple answer no they won't.

Sure, just like everyone in this thread who didnt know the family dont actually care.

They think it's very sad - it's possible to feel that way about a child you don't know.

Dudess · 24-02-2012 09:53PM

Nothingbetter2d wrote: »

with all the perverts and freaks out there you would want your toddler on a kiddie leash at all times when in a shopping centre. you were lucky.

There aren't that many perverts and freaks "out there" - most are known to the child.

Defiler Of The Coffin · 24-02-2012 09:59PM

Terrible tragedy, my heart goes out to the parents. Life can be so cruel.

Eric Cartman · 24-02-2012 10:03PM

Nothingbetter2d wrote: »

with all the perverts and freaks out there you would want your toddler on a kiddie leash at all times when in a shopping centre. you were lucky.

same amount of perverts as there always were, theyre just no longer respected members of the community

Dudess · 24-02-2012 10:18PM

homerjay2005 wrote: »

typical irish reaction to always look for a reason it happened and blame somebody

Is it typically Irish? And you're apportioning blame too.

terrible accident to happen, but what on earth is a 2 year doing outside and unsupervised....thats the bottom line. if you look for blame, blame the person who left the door unlocked or didnt notice the child was missing.

but sure blame the bankers, developers and all them lot who did somethign wrong 4 years ago, its all their fault, everything is their fault. as already said, this probably would have happened anywhere.

when i saw the word ghost estate getting the headline, i lost alot of interest in the story as i know people are going to use this as a stick to beat people with, when its nobodys fault but the people directly involved, IN MY OPINION.

But you're talking as if the parent(s) just didn't bother their arse watching the child - you don't know what happened. The overwhelming likelihood is it was an accident (a plethora of reasons as to how it could have been avoided have been given, but again, we don't know the circumstances) and look at how they're being punished now...

KKkitty · 24-02-2012 10:25PM

Dudess wrote: »

gemma188 wrote: »

KKkitty wrote: »

Anyone who has blamed FF for this just think for a second, will any of FF actually care or feel any guilt. Simple answer no they won't.

Sure, just like everyone in this thread who didnt know the family dont actually care.

They think it's very sad - it's possible to feel that way about a child you don't know.

They won't care for long simple as.

Einhard · 24-02-2012 10:33PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

sad but not the ghost estates fault. I entirely blame the parents.

Why? No parent in history has been able to keep an eye on their child every single second of every single day.

Godammit, this rush to blame people, and particularly the grieving parents, is maddening. What the hell is wrong with people?

RIP to the toddler. Deepest condolences to the parents.

Jammy Donut · 24-02-2012 10:38PM

RIP Little Guy.

Parents and Family must be feeling utter shocked right now.

Callipo · 24-02-2012 11:18PM

Very Sad.

My heart goes out to the parents.

Life can be a torment as well as beautiful.

I wouldn't wish this on anyone.

Blaming a puddle goes nowhere. More kids have died in slurry pits tbh.

Run_to_da_hills · 25-02-2012 12:09PM

This story has made it into the British Tabloids, at least they have the decency to moderate the readers comments.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2105804/Liam-Keogh-2-dead-Irish-ghost-estate-drowning-pool-water.html

matt-dublin · 25-02-2012 12:46PM

Anyone else think this could have happened in any estate just that it's a ghost estate it attracts more media?

At the end of the day the kid could have escaped from an apartment in town and been hit by a car of fallen into the docklands?

Tragic but IMO it could have happened anywhere to any child.

Nervous Wreck · 25-02-2012 12:57PM

Thought this thread was about ghosts killing toddlers.

ziggy23 · 25-02-2012 03:52PM

ash23 wrote: »

She's not a dog. And if I thought like that she'd never be let outside the front door. :rolleyes:

You cannot physically watch a child 24/7. It's impossible.
These things happen and sometimes the consequences are horrendous but more often than not it's nothing.
My point was that just because the child got far away from the mother, doesn't mean she didn't notice he was missing for ages. She might have copped it in a minute and just been unfortunate enough to look in the wrong place.

I dunno maybe I'm paranoid but I wont let go of my son's hand when we are out. This often causes tantrums but I don't care.He goes in the buggy if he's making a scene. I just always remember the Jamie Bulger case which absolutley terrifies me

:(

Kidchameleon · 25-02-2012 07:57PM

Who you gonna call? Ghost Busters!!!

Dudess · 25-02-2012 07:59PM

KKkitty wrote: »

Dudess wrote: »

gemma188 wrote: »

KKkitty wrote: »

Anyone who has blamed FF for this just think for a second, will any of FF actually care or feel any guilt. Simple answer no they won't.

Sure, just like everyone in this thread who didnt know the family dont actually care.

They think it's very sad - it's possible to feel that way about a child you don't know.

They won't care for long simple as.

Who's they?

miss no stars · 25-02-2012 09:05PM

The developer still exists, so there's no money to properly secure the site coming to the local authority... But does the developer have any money to keep the site secured?

This is a real issue. It can't be waived away under "sure puddles form everywhere". Puddles deep enough for a child to fall into and not be able to get out of tend not to happen in finished estates.

Let's get rid of the ghost estate monniker and call it what it is - a building site. An unsecuredbuilding site. Building sites have things like deep ditches, concrete blocks, wiring, cement (a toxic substance), high up places that aren't secure against kids getting to them and falling off them, basements that can fill with water. A building site that has gone idle for some time will have all of that with the added complication that it can be overgrown and a small child (or a not so small, maybe not even a child) simply won't see the danger. Yes you can drown in an inch of water, but how likely is that? In a finished estate, there simply aren't places where water can accumulate that deeply and finished estates have drainage that works, so water doesn't end up standing for so long.

This is not the mother's fault. She's a human being who's being punished far too much as it is. It's not the developer's fault, or the local authority's fault. Not directly anyway. It's a series of lapses on everyone's part that had a tragic outcome.

That doesn't mean that it's okay that the site was left as it was - as soon as word got out they were mending the fence that locals had been trying to get them to fix. The categories also need to be assessed. The country is spending billions paying our way out of this, what's a million to keep sites secured when compared with that?

This issue needs to be forced. Complete/make good the estates with people in them, properly secure and tidy up the building sites and keep them that way or hand them over to the local authority, who can demolish and recycle the material in partially completed houses/finish off any that are still viable then do a bit of landscaping.

Then the country ends up with a stock of completed, secured houses in finished but mostly unoccupied estates and finished estates that are smaller than had been planned, where previously there were building sites left unsecured.

RIP kiddo.

Ellis Dee · 25-02-2012 09:18PM

It's a terrible tragedy for the family and I feel for them, but a question that has to be asked is why a two-year-old was left unsupervised outdoors for any length of time at all. And with a dog as well. My dog loves children, but I wouldn't dream of leaving him alone with a small child for even a minute, because you never know what goes on in a canine head or what an unexpected movement by a child could lead to.:(

25-02-2012 10:21PM

Ellis Dee wrote: »

It's a terrible tragedy for the family and I feel for them, but a question that has to be asked is why a two-year-old was left unsupervised outdoors for any length of time at all. And with a dog as well. My dog loves children, but I wouldn't dream of leaving him alone with a small child for even a minute, because you never know what goes on in a canine head or what an unexpected movement by a child could lead to.:(

I highly doubt the child was left unsupervised outside at all, I think the child just got out of the house.

shampoosuicide · 25-02-2012 10:55PM

donalg1 wrote: »

The "you wouldn't know until you have had kids" line didn't take long to appear

took longer than the 'i blame the parents' line though.

shampoosuicide · 25-02-2012 11:01PM

some of these replies are ridiculous. what's a bigger priority for government funding? hospitals, where people are dying or suffering because of cuts? or 'finishing ghost estates', ghost estates that have so far claimed one victim? tragic yeah, but no more tragic than if the child chased the dog into a field and got trampled by a bull. the outdoors can be dangerous.

ash23 · 27-02-2012 09:54AM

ziggy23 wrote: »

I dunno maybe I'm paranoid but I wont let go of my son's hand when we are out. This often causes tantrums but I don't care.He goes in the buggy if he's making a scene. I just always remember the Jamie Bulger case which absolutley terrifies me :(

But as I said, there were two of us (my mum and me) in the shop. I glanced and my mum was over looking at something else and I (incorrectly) assumed my daughter had gone over with her when in fact she had bolted from the shop.

It's pretty hard to shop with one hand welded to a child.
What are the odds of something like that happening though? Miniscule.
She's 9 now and if I remembered what happened to Holly and Jessica she'd not be let out to play on her bike. If I remembered what happened to Philip Cairns she'd not be let walk to school. When she gets older if I remember what happened to Raoinaid Murray I'd never her let socialise. If I remember what happened to Manuela Riedo I'd never let her travel or go to college.

Personally I'm not willing to live like that. You can't always go for "worst case scenario" or you might as well never have kids.

giles lynchwood · 27-02-2012 11:08AM

Interesting that nobody blamed the dog.We really do love animal's.

27-02-2012 11:33AM

giles lynchwood wrote: »

Interesting that nobody blamed the dog.We really do love animal's.

That's because it wasn't a guide dog!

27-02-2012 11:36AM

ash23 wrote: »

Personally I'm not willing to live like that. You can't always go for "worst case scenario" or you might as well never have kids.

So true, the children would grow up paranoid as well if they were constantly "shielded" from the real world.

Doc Ruby · 27-02-2012 11:40AM

miss no stars wrote: »

Let's get rid of the ghost estate monniker and call it what it is - a building site. An unsecuredbuilding site. Building sites have things like deep ditches, concrete blocks, wiring, cement (a toxic substance), high up places that aren't secure against kids getting to them and falling off them, basements that can fill with water. A building site that has gone idle for some time will have all of that with the added complication that it can be overgrown and a small child (or a not so small, maybe not even a child) simply won't see the danger. Yes you can drown in an inch of water, but how likely is that? In a finished estate, there simply aren't places where water can accumulate that deeply and finished estates have drainage that works, so water doesn't end up standing for so long.

Yeah this is a clear developer/owner liability case here, and to be honest the mother should take them to court and wring every last cent out of them. No court in the land would hold her responsible.

There's no question that building sites should be left exposed like this, even fully grown people regularly come to harm in them.

A sad comment on the recklessness and me feinism of the dying days of the bubble.

27-02-2012 11:54AM

Doc Ruby wrote: »

Yeah this is a clear developer/owner liability case here, and to be honest the mother should take them to court and wring every last cent out of them. No court in the land would hold her responsible.

There's no question that building sites should be left exposed like this, even fully grown people regularly come to harm in them.

A sad comment on the recklessness and me feinism of the dying days of the bubble.

This is what makes the case so tragic, it could have been easily prevented if the site was secure, or more importantly the site security was maintained! Which was clearly not done here.

kylith · 27-02-2012 12:02PM

miss no stars wrote: »

The developer still exists, so there's no money to properly secure the site coming to the local authority... But does the developer have any money to keep the site secured?

This is a real issue. It can't be waived away under "sure puddles form everywhere". Puddles deep enough for a child to fall into and not be able to get out of tend not to happen in finished estates.

Puddles deep enough to drown an adult, let alone a child, form bloody everywhere in this country. You can drown by inhaling a teaspoonfull of water, so if you can't lift yourself up then the average pool of water at the side of an Irish kerb is more than enough to drown a person.

That's not to say that the ghost estates don't need to be finished, but as an earlier poster said; what with the lack of cars in ghost estates the kid was probably slightly less likely to die than in a finished estate.

Turpentine · 27-02-2012 12:46PM

Deleted User wrote: »

This is what makes the case so tragic, it could have been easily prevented if the site was secure, or more importantly the site security was maintained! Which was clearly not done here.

The tragedy may have been prevented if the child's own house was secure.

ash23 · 27-02-2012 01:21PM

Do all the people who are blaming the parents also disagree with pedestrian crossing, health and safety laws re: building sites, speed bumps etc?
To me it's fairly fundamentally obvious. If a place is dangerous and is not being worked on then it should be properly secure to prevent accidents. And the barriers should be checked and maintained.

Ghost estate claims first victim

Comments